|
|
Stan Lee's First Gay Superhero (Page 2)
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Suffolk, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by starman
Ok, here's another example:
BSG spoiler:
Gaita from Galactica. The ENTIRE series, so far as I know, we knew nothing about him. Watch webisode #1 and there he is kissing his boyfriend. It didn't matter if Gaita was gay or not, did it? No. Does it add to the story arc? Maybe, I haven't watched episodes 3-10 yet, but it sure as hell hasn't impacted the main arc at all (yet).
So again, here's a character made to be gay for what? Just so the producers can give themselves an "attaboy"?
B5 had a character that was gay and it worked because it didn't feel forced...like "HERE'S OUR GAY CHARACTER".
I don't care if people are gay or not, it's just not my thing. I also don't pick my nose, but some do, but that doesn't mean we need producers showing nose-picking people on TV just 'cuz. That's what bothers me about this "first gay superhero" thing. It doesn't seem to exist except to service Marvel and make themselves feel better about themselves.
It's politically incorrect to not go around saying you love gay people. They only market this like this to make gay people feel like they are included or something.
I don't hate gay people, I agree I get sick of being forced to acknowledge the fact, like I am supposed to give a **** or something. How many people come out of the closet and go on national television to proclaim their heterosexuality? None. So why should we give stage and a podium for gays to do it? Fact is, I don't think anyone gives a ****, they just say they do so as not to be labeled as homophobic or to be called politically incorrect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by starman
I don't care if people are gay or not, it's just not my thing. I also don't pick my nose, but some do, but that doesn't mean we need producers showing nose-picking people on TV just 'cuz. That's what bothers me about this "first gay superhero" thing. It doesn't seem to exist except to service Marvel and make themselves feel better about themselves.
There's the annoying part. It's a cheap way to get an "attaboy" from their friends and colleagues.
Pointless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ctt1wbw
Batman did. And he enjoyed it, by the look on his face.
Picked his nose?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
I read a forum today where someone said "look at all the abused and neglected children in the world. What does that tell you about hetero couples?".
I almost went ballistic on the guy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by starman
I read a forum today where someone said "look at all the abused and neglected children in the world. What does that tell you about hetero couples?".
Twisted logic 1 — Common sense 0.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Suffolk, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
You should have asked him if gay people can procreate. Since that is how the human species carries on. Not by adoption.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ctt1wbw
You should have asked him if gay people can procreate. Since that is how the human species carries on. Not by adoption.
I tried that route. They always claim adoption or fertilizing a woman. Sorry, women aren't baby machines. I find that distasteful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Suffolk, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
You could ask him why everyone is not born gay, since gay people think it's natural. If it was natural, then everyone would be born gay, and there would be no sexual reproduction. Babies would be born like Aliens or something. There would be asexual reproduction. Sorry, but being gay is a choice. Just like not eating meat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ctt1wbw
You could ask him why everyone is not born gay, since gay people think it's natural. If it was natural, then everyone would be born gay, and there would be no sexual reproduction. Babies would be born like Aliens or something. There would be asexual reproduction. Sorry, but being gay is a choice. Just like not eating meat.
PWL 1 — Cartoons and superheros 0.
Hello, PWL.
(Also: Erm, no.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Suffolk, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Dakar V
But what's his Superpower?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status:
Offline
|
|
I completely forgot about that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ctt1wbw
You could ask him why everyone is not born gay, since gay people think it's natural. If it was natural, then everyone would be born gay, and there would be no sexual reproduction. Babies would be born like Aliens or something. There would be asexual reproduction. Sorry, but being gay is a choice. Just like not eating meat.
Quite a bit of flawed logic there. To follow your logic, everyone would be identical. Blue eyes are natural just as brown eyes are. However, you don't see everyone being born with brown eyes. You see diversity instead.
|
Vandelay Industries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Suffolk, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
That's not flawed logic at all. The reason there are males and females of any species is procreation. The color of the eyes and hairs has nothing to do with procreation, that's why there are different colors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Actually, recent research seems to indicate that having a gay segment of a given population (remember, humans aren't the only species - by a long chalk - that exhibit homosexuality) presents a selective advantage to the entire population.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot
Actually, recent research seems to indicate that having a gay segment of a given population (remember, humans aren't the only species - by a long chalk - that exhibit homosexuality) presents a selective advantage to the entire population.
Because the population is provided with more interior designers?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The New Posts Button
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Laminar
Because the population is provided with more interior designers?
More superheroes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status:
Offline
|
|
I think it's more that the population is provided with groomers to help the heterosexuals procreate.
|
"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ctt1wbw
That's not flawed logic at all. The reason there are males and females of any species is procreation. The color of the eyes and hairs has nothing to do with procreation, that's why there are different colors.
That's not what your original argument was. You were saying that if homosexuality is natural, then everyone would be homosexual. That's the logic I was arguing against.
|
Vandelay Industries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Suffolk, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
I was trying to say that if the order of nature was for asexual reproduction, then homosexualtiy would be the norm, and heterosexuality was be abby-normal.
Since it is not this way, then I believe that homosexuality is abnormal behaivor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status:
Offline
|
|
An increase in the percentage of homosexuals is nature's way of saying:
"There are quite enough of you bastards around here."
It may be "abnormal" but it isn't exactly unnatural, either.
|
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ctt1wbw
I was trying to say that if the order of nature was for asexual reproduction, then homosexualtiy would be the norm, and heterosexuality was be abby-normal.
The prefix "a-" denotes ABSENCE.
"Asexual" means NOT sexual. Not homo-, not hetero-, nor any other kind of -sexual.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot
The prefix "a-" denotes ABSENCE.
"Asexual" means NOT sexual. Not homo-, not hetero-, nor any other kind of -sexual.
I think he meant procreation without sexual intercourse, i.e., insemination and (to the raising parents, though of course not to the birth parents) adoption.
Since it is not this way, then I believe that homosexuality is abnormal behaivor.
Abnormal, yes, since the norm is whatever is most prevalent. The fact that it’s abnormal doesn’t make it a choice, though. Just ask the superheroes. [/attempt at not derailing thread any further]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ctt1wbw
I was trying to say that if the order of nature was for asexual reproduction, then homosexualtiy would be the norm, and heterosexuality was be abby-normal.
Since it is not this way, then I believe that homosexuality is abnormal behaivor.
So is using a Mac or defusing bombs for a living. Doesn't mean such people don't deserve equal status to everyone else — or that they can't have TV shows about them.
On the topic of this superhero, I'll reserve judgment until I see the show. X-Men (also by Stan Lee, for those who don't follow comics) was blatantly political as well, and it turned out to be pretty good. Obviously the gay angle will get played up because homosexuals are somehow considered much more novel than superheroes, but that doesn't mean it can't have a good story in its own right.
|
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status:
Offline
|
|
I haven't read the thread but can someone tell me if Marvel explained why a comic book hero's sexual orientation is relevant to the story line? Unless there are romantic characters in the comic who are involved with the superhero, and the superhero's accomplishments*, I can see no reason to make a big deal out a superhero's sexual orientation other than for purely commercial gay-is-the-new-in-thing reasons. (Which, if that is the case, is really f***ing stupid.)
*I am thinking of something like the Spider-Man comic strip in the newspaper where Peter Parker's gal Mary Jane somehow always gets caught up in the final-confrontation-with-evil and her relationship to Peter Parker could compromise the secrecy of his Spider Man identity. So the fact they are in a romantic relationship with one each other does at times advance the narrative or help in defining why or how Spider Man acts in certain situations.
|
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Suffolk, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Chuckit
So is using a Mac or defusing bombs for a living. Doesn't mean such people don't deserve equal status to everyone else — or that they can't have TV shows about them.
On the topic of this superhero, I'll reserve judgment until I see the show. X-Men (also by Stan Lee, for those who don't follow comics) was blatantly political as well, and it turned out to be pretty good. Obviously the gay angle will get played up because homosexuals are somehow considered much more novel than superheroes, but that doesn't mean it can't have a good story in its own right.
Gays already have equal status. Gays can have jobs, houses, cars, run for office, pay taxes, and die. Just like heterosexuals. What gays want is "extra" status and "extra" rights that no other segment in society has. And making tv shows solely for the purpose of touting your pride in having a gay character just defeats the purpose. How many tv shows are created for the same reason about heteros?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Suffolk, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
I wonder if a gay superhero tried to give you mouth to mouth, could you sue him for attempted murder?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ctt1wbw
Gays already have equal status. Gays can have jobs, houses, cars, run for office, pay taxes, and die. Just like heterosexuals. What gays want is "extra" status and "extra" rights that no other segment in society has. And making tv shows solely for the purpose of touting your pride in having a gay character just defeats the purpose. How many tv shows are created for the same reason about heteros?
Except they can't get married.
|
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ctt1wbw
Gays already have equal status. Gays can have jobs, houses, cars, run for office, pay taxes, and die. Just like heterosexuals. What gays want is "extra" status and "extra" rights that no other segment in society has. And making tv shows solely for the purpose of touting your pride in having a gay character just defeats the purpose. How many tv shows are created for the same reason about heteros?
What extra rights are you referring to?
|
Vandelay Industries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Suffolk, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
I don't think that marriage is a right. Otherwise, all single people would be suing someone for violating their rights, right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ctt1wbw
I wonder if a gay superhero tried to give you mouth to mouth, could you sue him for attempted murder?
What do you mean?
|
Vandelay Industries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Suffolk, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Art Vandelay
What extra rights are you referring to?
How about the health care issue? Why should unmarried gay couples get health care by their employers, but not unmarried heterosexual couples?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Suffolk, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Art Vandelay
What do you mean?
I remember a news story about someone being convicted of attempted murder for having aids and sleeping with people and disclosing the fact that they had aids/hiv. Since it can be spread through saliva, if you get mouth to mouth by a gay Batman, you could sue him for attempted murder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ctt1wbw
I don't think that marriage is a right. Otherwise, all single people would be suing someone for violating their rights, right?
I don't follow.
|
Vandelay Industries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ctt1wbw
How about the health care issue? Why should unmarried gay couples get health care by their employers, but not unmarried heterosexual couples?
Gays can't marry. However, I think it should apply to any domestic partnership. In a few states, it does.
|
Vandelay Industries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ctt1wbw
I remember a news story about someone being convicted of attempted murder for having aids and sleeping with people and disclosing the fact that they had aids/hiv. Since it can be spread through saliva, if you get mouth to mouth by a gay Batman, you could sue him for attempted murder.
AFAIK, there isn't a single case of HIV being spread via saliva. Further, assuming that because someone is gay that they must be HIV+ is offensive.
|
Vandelay Industries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Suffolk, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Art Vandelay
I don't follow.
Is marriage a RIGHT? Like the RIGHT to privacy and life,et al? So if someone isn't married, are their rights being violated? And who would they sue because of it? And what would the outcome at court be? I'm sure it'd be a jury trial, what would the jury award the single person who's rights are vioalted due to him/her being single? Marriage is a union, not a right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Suffolk, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Art Vandelay
Gays can't marry. However, I think it should apply to any domestic partnership. In a few states, it does.
Wow. Just wow. So any couple living together should get free medical care provided for by the other's employer? Holy ****, who would pay for that? Remember, domestic partnership can be a man and a woman, too. Plus, you could get away with saying that if a man and a woman shared a house out of necessity, they should get free health care?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ctt1wbw
Is marriage a RIGHT? Like the RIGHT to privacy and life,et al? So if someone isn't married, are their rights being violated? And who would they sue because of it? And what would the outcome at court be? I'm sure it'd be a jury trial, what would the jury award the single person who's rights are vioalted due to him/her being single? Marriage is a union, not a right.
Whether it's a right or not, a single straight person can be married if they choose. Gays can not. Gays are not even given the choice.
|
Vandelay Industries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Suffolk, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Well, then chose to be a hetero. Like I said earlier, being gay is a choice. Being gay goes against the way nature is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ctt1wbw
Wow. Just wow. So any couple living together should get free medical care provided for by the other's employer? Holy ****, who would pay for that? Remember, domestic partnership can be a man and a woman, too. Plus, you could get away with saying that if a man and a woman shared a house out of necessity, they should get free health care?
Yes, I know a domestic partnership can be a man and a woman. That's why I said what I said. In most cases, you have to sign a legal affidavit declaring a homosexual domestic partnership to obtain benefits. The same can be required for any domestic partnership.
|
Vandelay Industries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ctt1wbw
Well, then chose to be a hetero. Like I said earlier, being gay is a choice. Being gay goes against the way nature is.
Just because you say it's a choice, doesn't make it a choice. Ask any gay person if they chose to be gay and they'll tell you no.
|
Vandelay Industries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ctt1wbw
Well, then chose to be a hetero. Like I said earlier, being gay is a choice. Being gay goes against the way nature is.
You're just chock-full of all kinds of wisdom today, aren't you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status:
Offline
|
|
Guys, guys, guys...come on. I want to be able to enjoy homo-erotic imagery of Batman and Robin without having to go into the PW Lounge, so maybe just agree to disagree here?
|
"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
Gay kids need a superhero whose situation they can relate to. Someone, Stan Lee or otherwise, should produce a TV series or comic book with such a character that is aimed not so much at critical, mature audiences but at kids.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: WI, United States
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by starman
I also don't pick my nose
Yeah right.
|
I have returned... 2020 MacBook Air - 1.1 GHz Quad-Core i5 - 16 GB RAM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|